Did you see a robbery in the scoring of Pacman-JMM II?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by hmi, Mar 16, 2008.

  1. EARL

    EARL Active Member Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,248
    Likes Received:
    1
    This is so ****ing stupid that people are questioning this being a " robbery ".


    I had money on Marquez so naturally I was a little biased towards JMM as the fight was happening but I definitely wasn't crying foul once the decision was announced. As a matter of fact.. I think this was one of the fairest decisions I've seen in a while.
     
  2. psychopath

    psychopath D' "X" Factor Full Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    26,390
    Likes Received:
    2
    Nopes . . . everybody was saying it can go both ways . . . so how can people call that a robbery after Pacquaio was announced the winner?

    If JMM had won . . . the other side can also claim robbery . . . that's how close it is.
     
  3. boxeo#1

    boxeo#1 Boxer-Puncher banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    8,993
    Likes Received:
    1
    The way you reply says it all about YOU:rofl :yep dumb sh*t read my argument. Omg what a lame *ss
     
  4. BigBone

    BigBone Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,506
    Likes Received:
    1,761
    I wouldn't say robbery. I saw a close fight with Marquez winnin on my card, and I felt a bit bad after they announced the winner because I though he deserved the decision. But robbery? I wouldn't say that!

    Larry Merchant, Dan Rafael, AP and others, most who actually wrote down the scores had Marquez ahead but nobody was talking about ROBBERY. It was a close fight, definitely no robbery!

    Even Nonito Donaire though that Marquez won it by 114-113 and he wasn't talking about robbery...
     
  5. boxeo#1

    boxeo#1 Boxer-Puncher banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    8,993
    Likes Received:
    1
    Absolutely right. I mean shouldn't we all know what a robbery means?:huh :blood If fighter A wins 10 rounds and fighter B 2 rounds, but fighter B gets the win/decision, than THAT is what you call a robbery.

    A fight like this disputable and somewhat controversial, but not a robbery.

    NB.: I did voted robbery and you can find the reason in an aforementioned post.
     
  6. Amsterdam

    Amsterdam Boris Christoff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    18,436
    Likes Received:
    24
    Still was ****ing clear as day for Marquez. Close doesn't mean that one day didn't do enough to clearly take it and in the case that it's not given to him, it's incompetent scoring and robbing the clear victor.

    There is only so much subjectivity with scoring, this fight wasn't like Vasquez-Marquez 3 where it was literally 50/50 in about 6 different rounds.
     
  7. Rise Above

    Rise Above IBHOF elector Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    8,038
    Likes Received:
    39
    No robbery, I did think marquez won but can see how it could have went either way.
     
  8. Amsterdam

    Amsterdam Boris Christoff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    18,436
    Likes Received:
    24
    I score every fight unbiased, there is only one criteria for scoring a bout -

    Clean punching
    Effective punching
    Defence
    Ring Generalship

    A mix of those properties with the first two being the most important of course.

    I had it 8 rounds to 4 Marquez, with the KD added, that's 115-112, I've watched it 3 times and have come up with the same score twice and then 114-113 Marquez being as lenient to Pac as I could get.

    Basically, Pac DIDNT WIN, therefore the fight was given to the wrong guy....

    Ugh, fight wasn't given to the real winner guys, know what that's called?

    A ****ing robbery.:smoke

    The only difference is that it wasn't something we call a 'highway' robbery, as the scores were not way off, but they still were incorrect.
     
  9. boxeo#1

    boxeo#1 Boxer-Puncher banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Messages:
    8,993
    Likes Received:
    1
    You know... it's hard to not agree with this.
     
  10. Amsterdam

    Amsterdam Boris Christoff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    18,436
    Likes Received:
    24
    It's not one of the highlight robberies of this generation, or even in the last 12 months mind you, but it's a **** decision and just because it was a close fight doesn't mean that 'it coulda gone eitha way hehehe' type of nonsense logic comes into play everytime.

    Fight was clear as crystal that JMM at best took it by 3 points and at the very least edged it, meaning that Pac didn't do enough to win and the wrong guy was given the decision on paper.
     
  11. hmi

    hmi Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,257
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll just give a little correction on the criteria that you enumerated. The criteria should be:
    1. Effective Aggression
    2. Defense
    3. Ring Generalship
    4. Clean and Hard Punching
     
  12. Amsterdam

    Amsterdam Boris Christoff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    18,436
    Likes Received:
    24
    Effective aggression ties into Ring Generalship as if you are using it effectively against the opponent, you're controlling the fight.

    Hard punching ties into 'effective punching', which is not the same necessarily as the clean work.

    You corrected nothing.;)
     
  13. Nestea

    Nestea Thirst Remover Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2008
    Messages:
    7,336
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just give it up, its a close call to make. Can go either way no robbery.

    Pacquiao has already said that he would take the rematch, So JMM-MP III is not anymore close to impossible. Though JMM would be the one who will try to catch MP at 135lbs, where MP will take the weight advantage(knowing he weighted 145lbs at fight night).
     
  14. CJLightweight

    CJLightweight Lightweight Kingpin Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Messages:
    6,598
    Likes Received:
    2
    I read your ****ing dumb argument and it tells me how **** your brain is. If you don't get it I don't need to explain, people like you wouldn't let their brain cells work for 1 minute:yep

    btw, i scored it for marquez:deal but it was no way robbery.
    You sound like an ignorant fool with that excuse:rofl
     
  15. MancMexican

    MancMexican Blood & Guts Forever Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    5,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    A close fight by definition cannot be a robbery, especially when the scoring was close as well.

    I thought Marquez won it by a round and have no problem with Pacquiao winning it by a round.